Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: November 2022

I P C Murder

HELD the High Court is justified in reversing the judgment of acquittal by the Trial Court- the motive is treated secondary in view of the fact that this is a case of direct evidence of injured eye-witnesses- the facts narrated in the FIR are fully corroborated by much of the documentary evidence and are fully in consonance with the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. the only question related to the persons involved and the manner of commission of the offence. Finding of trial Court that the arrest and recovery were doubtful were glaring mistakes. H C completely justified. Dismissed

Nov 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ASHOK KUMAR SINGH CHANDEL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat and Pamidighantam…

Banking Constitution

Contract Act, 1872 – Section 62 – One Time Settlement Scheme – – Impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court granting further time to the borrower to make the balance payment under the OTS Scheme in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is unsustainable and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside

Nov 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE BANK OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. ARVINDRA ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil…

Consumer

Consumer – Illegal sold of hypothecated vehicle – Compensation – Hypothecated vehicle was detained/seized and thereafter, sold which was found to be illegal, the complainant shall be entitled to the compensation/loss suffered because of not plying of the vehicle seized and sold illegally

Nov 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED — Appellant Vs. NIZAMUDDIN — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

I P C POCSO

(IPC) – S 302, 376A, 376(2)(i) and 376(2)(m) – POCSO Act, 2012 – Ss 5 (i) and 5(m) 6 – HELD modify the sentence imposed for the offence under Sections 376(2)(i) and 376(2)(m) of IPC and for the offence under Section 5 (i) and 5 (m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, so as to commensurate the said sentences with the sentence imposed for the offence under Section 376(A) of IPC, and accordingly imposes sentence directing the appellant/petitioner to undergo imprisonment for a period of twenty years instead of life imprisonment for the said offences – Petition allowed.

Nov 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MOHD. FIROZ — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI, S. Ravindra Bhat and Bela M.…

C P C

Trial court  allowed application for temporary injunction – defendants  directed to maintain status quo of the property mentioned in the Will –  required the defendants to furnish the list and account of the movable properties within 30 days from the date of the order – HELD the trial court recorded specific findings on the three ingredients for grant of temporary injunction i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss.

Nov 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARISH ISHWARBHAI PATEL — Appellant Vs. JATIN ISHWARBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil…

Education

Education – Admission to Postgraduate Dental Course – Even if on the last date of admission, seats remained vacant was no ground by the institutions/colleges to grant admissions unilaterally and that too without intimating the vacant seats to the Directorate – High Court directing admissions quashed

Nov 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. SAILENDRA SHARMA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters
Service

UGC Regulations – Appointment of Vice Chancellor – – State Act if not on a par with the UGC Regulations, must be amended to bring it on a par with the applicable UGC Regulations and until then it is the applicable UGC Regulations that shall prevail – A subordinate legislation, UGC Regulations become part of the Act –

Nov 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PROFESSOR (DR.) SREEJITH P.S. — Appellant Vs. DR. RAJASREE M.S. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 – Rules 6, 8 and 10 – Neither the procedure as being known to the scheme of Rules 1969 nor further action, if any, initiated has been placed on record – The stage to inflict penalty upon the appellant, in the given facts and circumstances, does not arise.

Nov 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. AJIT KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar,…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw